WTF is the logic here….user just outed as a sock and 220 articles are suddenly deemed to be unfit for the wiki due to the creators unruly behavior…
https://xtools.wmflabs.org/pages/en.wik ... Copper1993
220 Articles G5’d….
-
Jake Is A Sellout
- Sucks Warrior
- Posts: 717
- Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2021 1:01 am
- Been thanked: 113 times
Re: 220 Articles G5’d….
The logic is that if the banned user sees their post ban created articles get deleted regardless of their merit, they will go away.
It's all part of the warped Wikipediot logic that bans apply to people not accounts, and is in the fine tradition of Wikipediots claiming that content is all that matters to them, but in reality showing that behaviour, and specifically the THRILL of the HUNT, is the most important thing to them.
Like most things the Wikipedia editors believe is logical, the evidence shows them to be idiots, since unsurprisingly, in this specific case, the sock was only detected because they recreated material already deleted under G5. And their next sock will be detected the same way. Which all rather proves G5 is not the deterrent they seem to wish it were.
Some might say that shows the reason the socks are recreating these things is not because they desperately want to be part of the Wikipedia encyclopedia building business, its because they want to be part of the Wikipedia destroying business. After all, there are not many more uncomfortable introductions to Wikipedia for genuine new users who might be creating this sort of stuff for the very first time, than some ambitious wikishit aggressively asking you the question, is this your first account?
You won't hear this on Wikipediocracy, because their leader is a sell out piece of shit who makes makes it his business to help the sort of people for whom the HUNT is their idea of a good use of a human life, but to those out there who choose to follow the HTD path by trying to destroy Wikipedia in this manner, keep it up. You are doing good works.
Ideological purity has its rewards. Both Earthly and Heavenly.
This is a perfect example of the effectiveness of asymmetric warfare. It takes little effort to create hundreds of G5able articles, yet as this case shows, it takes them multiple man hours to do what they think needs to be done to deal with this supposed problem.
That both ensures that more vandalism and other bad edits will go undetected while these finite governance resources are distracted with this pointlessness, and makes sure these critical users are more cranky and less mindful of good policy when interacting with genuine new users who are causing genuine problems and could, with careful handling, been turned into productive editors.
Perhaps the best reason to do it, is because it distracts the very scarce resources of CheckUser capacity away from chasing down real threats, and in the long term, encourages them to promote people to this role who lack the necessary morals and mindfulness that their chief task is not to better facilitate the HUNT, it is the protection of Wikipedia against class action privacy lawsuits.
My favourite part of this utter nonsense? This from the deleting Admin....
Wikishits.
Properly stupid.
HTD.
It's all part of the warped Wikipediot logic that bans apply to people not accounts, and is in the fine tradition of Wikipediots claiming that content is all that matters to them, but in reality showing that behaviour, and specifically the THRILL of the HUNT, is the most important thing to them.
Like most things the Wikipedia editors believe is logical, the evidence shows them to be idiots, since unsurprisingly, in this specific case, the sock was only detected because they recreated material already deleted under G5. And their next sock will be detected the same way. Which all rather proves G5 is not the deterrent they seem to wish it were.
Some might say that shows the reason the socks are recreating these things is not because they desperately want to be part of the Wikipedia encyclopedia building business, its because they want to be part of the Wikipedia destroying business. After all, there are not many more uncomfortable introductions to Wikipedia for genuine new users who might be creating this sort of stuff for the very first time, than some ambitious wikishit aggressively asking you the question, is this your first account?
You won't hear this on Wikipediocracy, because their leader is a sell out piece of shit who makes makes it his business to help the sort of people for whom the HUNT is their idea of a good use of a human life, but to those out there who choose to follow the HTD path by trying to destroy Wikipedia in this manner, keep it up. You are doing good works.
Ideological purity has its rewards. Both Earthly and Heavenly.
This is a perfect example of the effectiveness of asymmetric warfare. It takes little effort to create hundreds of G5able articles, yet as this case shows, it takes them multiple man hours to do what they think needs to be done to deal with this supposed problem.
That both ensures that more vandalism and other bad edits will go undetected while these finite governance resources are distracted with this pointlessness, and makes sure these critical users are more cranky and less mindful of good policy when interacting with genuine new users who are causing genuine problems and could, with careful handling, been turned into productive editors.
Perhaps the best reason to do it, is because it distracts the very scarce resources of CheckUser capacity away from chasing down real threats, and in the long term, encourages them to promote people to this role who lack the necessary morals and mindfulness that their chief task is not to better facilitate the HUNT, it is the protection of Wikipedia against class action privacy lawsuits.
My favourite part of this utter nonsense? This from the deleting Admin....
Surely if the logic of G5 is showing banned users that their articles get deleted, speed is desirable? Perhaps even essential.I wish page taggers wouldn't attack their job with such gusto, it's easier to handle a few articles at a time rather than over a hundred. As far as CSD G5s, there is really no reason to rush their deletion. Liz Read! Talk! 02:39, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
Wikishits.
Properly stupid.
HTD.
-
Jake Is A Sellout
- Sucks Warrior
- Posts: 717
- Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2021 1:01 am
- Been thanked: 113 times
Re: 220 Articles G5’d….
Wikipediocracy, the natural home of sell outs....
HEY JAKE!
Are you paying your forum members to parrot Wikipedia philosophy as if it makes sense? Or are they just taking your lead?
Roll up, roll up, get your Kool-Aid here!
Banned means banned!
Delete 200 G5s and be rewarded with seventy virgins!
Wasn't like this before you took over Jake. Everyone knows, especially the Wikishits.
It was quite the reverse in fact, and famously so for one prominent figure, whose reply to the idea expressed above that if Wikipedia editors try to stop you doing something you should just stop, is keenly awaited.
He is still around, right? Or have you banned them, on Jimmy Wales' personal orders?
Hmm.
List of things Wikipedia editors have told people to stop doing.
My, wouldn't that be a list!
Won't get published on your forum though, eh?
Beeblebrox wouldn't allow it.
AndyTheSellout wrote:What's the logic behind repeatedly creating articles if you know they are going to be deleted?
HEY JAKE!
Are you paying your forum members to parrot Wikipedia philosophy as if it makes sense? Or are they just taking your lead?
Roll up, roll up, get your Kool-Aid here!
Banned means banned!
Delete 200 G5s and be rewarded with seventy virgins!
Wasn't like this before you took over Jake. Everyone knows, especially the Wikishits.
It was quite the reverse in fact, and famously so for one prominent figure, whose reply to the idea expressed above that if Wikipedia editors try to stop you doing something you should just stop, is keenly awaited.
He is still around, right? Or have you banned them, on Jimmy Wales' personal orders?
Hmm.
List of things Wikipedia editors have told people to stop doing.
My, wouldn't that be a list!
Won't get published on your forum though, eh?
Beeblebrox wouldn't allow it.
-
ericbarbour
- Sucks Admin
- Posts: 4664
- Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
- Location: The ass-tral plane
- Has thanked: 1180 times
- Been thanked: 1873 times
Re: 220 Articles G5’d….
"Logic"? Hah. Wikipedia is now controlled by deletionist patrollers who get an orgasm from blocking people. Even though "HordeFTL" was creating valid content? Does not matter. This is a serial sockpuppet and the little bastards have to "punish" him and utterly destroy everything he did. It is routine and Wikipedia suffers for it and they do not care.
PS he's got a YouTube page
https://www.youtube.com/c/HordeFTL
72, and I suspect there are maybe four or five observant Muslims on all of en-WP. No virgins for patrollers because they ARE the virgins.Delete 200 G5s and be rewarded with seventy virgins!